PUBLIC OPINION > Welfare Recipients Should Take Drug Tests
SodaHead News
2012/04/23 23:00:00
Georgia recently became the third state to require drug testing for welfare recipients. Michigan passed a similar law, but it was ruled unconstitutional in 2003. Florida also passed a law, but federal lawsuits are holding it up in court. Opponent organizations like the ACLU are already threatening to take action against Georgia's law, set to go into effect on July 1, but we wanted to know how the public feels about it.
Despite legal complications in the past, the vast majority of voters are fine with the drug tests. In fact, they think it's a good idea. It's easy to read the law as an attack on benefits in general, but most people agree it's a fair measure that private employers use all the time. The Top Opinion wrote, "I have to take random tests to receive my paycheck. Why can't welfare recipients do the same to get their paycheck?"
Leniency From the Left
Progressives and liberals were two of the only demographics to side against the measure. It might seem odd that government intervention would be embraced by the right and rejected by the left, but welfare is already a relatively liberal concept, and some see the test as a way of scaling back government aid. Plus, liberal note that welfare can be issued in the form of food stamps. However, moderates mostly sided with conservatives on this one.
No Complaints From the Unemployed
Surprisingly enough, unemployed voters agreed with the majority -- 77% of them think welfare applicants should be tested for drug use. Granted, it would only affect unemployed people who also do drugs, but it was an interesting statistic nonetheless. Part-time workers seemed a lot more concerned about it. Maybe because they aren't job hunting...
Smokers Sign Off
Obviously, we can't ask users if they do drugs. The closest thing we can come to is inquiring about legal substance use -- smokers and drinkers, in particular. Maybe they're a little more likely to empathize with addiction. But here, too, the vote was overwhelmingly in favor of Georgia's laws. It's not looking good for drug addicts on welfare.
If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about drug testing and welfare. We'd love to hear from you!
If that is your rationale,....perhaps you should just leave.
2ndly, how does thinking one's civil liberties are precious make one anti-american? It's sorta what the country was founded on, back when pot was legal, and many of the founding fathers grew it in their fields.
3rd, how does overcrowding our prisons, and putting otherwise law abiding citizens in prison justifiable over the possession of something scientifically proven to be less dangerous than alcohol?
4th, why don't conservatives move to a country that is an actual theocracy where the people don't mind being unjustly punished for not creating victims?
5th, when are conservatives going to stop bitching about the war on drugs, the Mexican cartels inner city gangs, terrorist organizations, and the dead bodies in the streets; and do something about it, like take away one of their biggest revenue streams and putting it in our own public coffers?
It's as dumb as the European Union's ban on snus, despite 30% of the continent smoking like chimneys. (snus being less dangerous by default, as it doesn't affect your respiratory system)
Oh yeah, that's right.
Or as Richard Nixon put it "you can't make it illegal in this country to be young, poor, or black, but you can outlaw their vices".
You don't like conservative views,.... I sure as heck don't care for yours!
In fact, you're the only person i've ever seen even try to dispute it.
Most places cut you off after a certain amount of time of not having a job, or at least trying to get one, and you still get food stamps even after you get a minimum wage job.
Depending on how many kids you have, or where you live, it's not all that uncommon for people making 20-30k a year to receive some sort of state or federal sanctioned benefit, aka welfare.
If you ever decide to sue your school system for denying you an adequate education, i'll happily represent you.
I feel we could make a compelling case just with this thread. I mean honestly, you have the entire internet at your disposal to better yourself and learn something, and instead you use it exclusively to show complete strangers how ignorant you are.
The established facts that you boast of are nothing more than your own interpretations and spins of what you want others to believe in,....anyone with any kind of common sense knows that the gov. can't afford to be supplementing the drug habits of the millions of individuals on welfare,...and then to couple things with some moronic fear of over populating our prisons with hardened criminals,.....but instead have them walking freely on the streets.
Please do feel free to roam through this post attempting to scold others with your own ignorance regarding the world that surrounds you,....but don't waste any more of your time on folks like me.
Conservatives... Once again differing from reality.
Is there a problem with the guy writing the Law that forces an employee to Drug Test being subjected to his own Law ? ...... or the ' Trickle--Down ' guy having to take the same test that the guy took to provide that freeride for him ?
The guy getting the money that I pee'd for should also have to pee.
if i smoke a joint today, i'll fail every drug test i take for at least the next week. despite not actually ever being under the influence at work, or having my performance suffer, i'll still lose my job.
If that was how Alcohol was looked at, there would be congressional hearings and supreme court rulings. But because it's mostly minorities and young people who smoke pot, it's an acceptable intrusion.
It's also a gateway to Big Business controlling your life. How much longer till your toilette reports back to your Insurance company what's in your urine every morning, jacking up your rates for every cocktail you consume? (a concept already proposed, with existing technology)
Then if that seemingly business smart ground is given, what's to stop your employers from getting a subpoena for your urine records?
And how is that any different from them putting cameras in your house to make sure you live your life exactly how they see fit?
What about that doesn't attack your personal pursuit of happiness?
The battle cry of oppression is always the same "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about".
Maybe i like to be wrong from time to time without hurting anyone, or having everyone up in my business.
It's easy to over generalize and demonize those who appear funny to you. But when they have a legitimate point that the majority of Americans identify with, it also makes you look foolish to oppose them. I agree that OWS was mishandled from the beginnings. Anarchy is never the answer, and 9 out of 10 demographics agree hand signals are gay. (the 10th demographic are actually the gays)
how ever, if you don't see a problem with how corporate america is more and more being treated like special class citizens, while the population is more and more just a renewable resource for them, you're blind. If you do see it, and you're on the side of the corporate agenda, you're the enemy.
You, as a driver, have to be tested because you have an occupation that deals directly with public safety. I don't know what you drive, but, truckers- for example- have drug tests & physicals every 6 months to 2 years (depending on the health of the driver) that are USDOT regulated. And while most companies they work for issue their own drug tests on top of that, they actually don't have to.